CT Voices for Children is absolutely right about CT budget situation

Statement from CT Voices June 30, 2017;

Connecticut Voices for Children strongly believes that a fiscally responsible and stable state budget is the cornerstone for equitable economic growth. The only way to build a strong foundation for long-term inclusive economic prosperity is having a state government with solid finances that is willing and able to support long-term strategies for economic growth and equitable opportunity.

Connecticut’s current fiscal crisis is the result of years of short-term budget thinking and a failure to address our state’s economic challenges. During the past few months, Connecticut policymakers have struggled with the daunting task of closing a budget gap not of their own making. After years of short-term fixes, they are now confronted with a harsh fiscal reality with no easy solutions.

As the Governor and the Legislature go back to the drawing board this special session, we urge them to ground their work in an understanding of the economic, demographic, and political changes which have created today’s ever-growing challenge.

The state budget is the clearest statement of Connecticut’s policy priorities. Working from our strengths, and with the courage to address our weaknesses, we can build a more inclusive economy that enables all families to thrive, provides quality education for all children from cradle to career, and provides the support services necessary to ensure that no child is left behind.

To achieve these priorities, the Governor and General Assembly must seek a balanced approach that combines smart, strategic spending in key budget priorities with tax reforms that assure fairness, stability, predictability, and adequacy. Connecticut needs a stable, responsible budget, with real structural reforms, rejecting the crisis-driven, short-term approach that has marked state fiscal policy for years. Legislators should create a stable revenue stream by modernizing Connecticut’s tax structure to reflect its changing economy, which is increasingly built on services rather than goods. This will require combining bold revenue reforms with a strategic rethinking of budget priorities that include a renewed willingness for forward-looking investments in education, workforce development, and health.

We understand that this shift will not be easy; Connecticut’s fiscal woes are deep, and fixing them will require making many hard decisions. Connecticut Voices for Children believes, however, that working together we can reach a balanced budget that ensures that our state is an attractive place to find a job, start a business, and raise a family. It is time for everyone that cares about the future of our state to set our differences aside and work towards this common goal.

Connecticut elected officials propose record budget cuts to public colleges and universities

While remaining dedicated to coddling the rich by refusing to require them to pay their fair share in taxes, Governor Malloy and members of the Connecticut General Assembly have offered up state budget plans that that will decimate Connecticut’s public colleges and universities and lead to significantly higher tuition at UConn, CSU and the state’s community colleges.

Governor Malloy has already presided over the deepest cuts in state history to Connecticut’s public institutions of higher education but now he – and both parties in the legislature – are seeking truly unprecedented cuts in state funding levels for the University of Connecticut, Connecticut State Universities and Connecticut’s Community Colleges.

These cuts will lead to higher costs for Connecticut families and reduced offerings at Connecticut’s colleges and universities.  The proposals will lead to nothing more than students paying more and getting less.

Faced with a $5 billion projected budget shortfall, Malloy and the Democratic and Republican caucuses in the State Senate and State House of Representatives recently offered up revised budget proposals aimed at addressing Connecticut’s growing fiscal crisis.

The new proposed budgets rely heavily on cuts to education and human services.

In February, Governor Malloy proposed a $38 million in budget cuts to the CSU/Community College budget, a cut that would come on top of Malloy’s massive cuts over the last few years.

Then this past week, Malloy and the Republicans both proposed nearly $25 million more in cuts to CSU and the Community Colleges, while the incredibly outrageous proposal from the Democrats would actually cut off as much as $90 million in state aid to the schools.

As previously noted, in Connecticut, the poor pay about 12% of their income in state and local taxes, the Middle Class about 10% and the state’s wealthiest citizen’s only pay about 5.5% of their income in state and local taxes.

However, rather than require wealthy residents to pay their fair share in taxes, Democrats and Republicans are seeking to dump the state’s budget problems on those least able to pay more.

The cuts to public colleges and universities will certainly lead to massive increases in tuition – which is nothing short of a tax increase on those who are already paying more than their fair share.

As the CT Mirror reported on the Democratic Plan;

Public colleges and universities also face very deep cuts under the Democratic plan.

The University of Connecticut, which already faced a deep cut under the budget Malloy proposed back in February, would lose another $35 million over the next two fiscal years combined under the Democratic legislators’ proposal.

And the Board of Regents of Higher Education, which oversees the state universities and community colleges, would lose another $100 million over the biennium.

The Governor and legislature have no begun closed door negotiations over the budget plan and there appears to be no one in the room who is willing to stand up and speak out on behalf of adequate funding for Connecticut’s colleges and universities.

Breaking News – Connecticut Income Tax collections down $450 million from anticipated amount

Connecticut’s economy continues to be in deep trouble.  While unemployment is technically down, the way the economy is changing means lower income tax revenue for the state of Connecticut.

Some Connecticut residents have simply given up looking for work.  Others have taken jobs that pay well below what they used to earn and still other are working in part-time consulting work as opposed to full-time jobs.

Together these changes mean Connecticut’s tax picture is in deep trouble.

As Keith Phaneuf of the CT Mirror explained today;

Plummeting state income tax collections are experiencing their worst decline since the last recession, falling $450 million below anticipated levels for April.

The impact of this decline in revenue not only means Connecticut will face a budget deficit this year, but the revenue shortfall for the next two years will be much more severe than previously estimated.   The 3.6 billion deficit projected over the next biannual budget will grow by $500 million next year and $600 million the year after.

The state will now be facing a $4.5 billion gap between projected revenue and projected expenses.

As CT Mirror wrote, the new numbers mean that the state will probably

Close its third successive fiscal year in deficit;

And deplete its $235.6 million emergency budget reserve.

It increases the risk that state government might have to borrow to cover operating costs for the first time in eight years — even though it still hasn’t paid off nearly $1 billion in operating debt from the last recession.

Read more about this breaking story at: CT tax revenue in free fall, adding $1.1B in red ink for next 2 years

Malloy’s austerity budget a disaster for Connecticut…

Governor Dannel Malloy is blasting the legislature for talking about additional revenue to help fund critically important services.

Although Malloy’s budget relies on increasing taxes for poor and middle-class families and shifting $400 million onto the backs of local property taxpayers, he is claiming that the solution to Connecticut’s fiscal crisis is his budget plan.

Malloy’s continued refusal to ensure the rich are paying their fair share means poorer and middle income families are suffering on both the tax and expenditure side of the budget.

As CT Voices explains;

The Governor’s Budget would reduce the Earned Income Tax Credit, remove parents from HUSKY A, eliminate property tax support for the lower and middle classes, keep young children out of  Care 4 Kids funded child care, and cut municipal aid to 141 towns. Statewide, proposed cuts to the EITC and the property tax credit are equal to a tax increase of $93 for low-income families and $157 for middle-income families.

CT Voices adds;

Many of the Governor’s cost-savings proposals target the same groups of low- to middle-income families.

For example, a single mother with two children making $30,000 per year would lose her health insurance, be unable to enroll her children in Care4Kids, and could see a tax increase of $93. A single parent working for $12 per hour with a child would also lose her health insurance at the same time the state restricts her access to child care and increases her taxes.

In response to the Governor’s outrageous budget proposal, some Connecticut legislators are talking about increasing the tax rate on high income earners in Connecticut.

Remember, in Connecticut, the poor pay about 12% of their income in state and local taxes, the middle class about 10% of their income in state and local taxes and the rich only pay about 5.5% of their income in state and local taxes.

Connecticut has created a regressive tax structure that unfairly hurts lower and middle income families.

It is time for Connecticut’s legislators to stand up to Malloy’s bullying tactics and move forward with a tax reform proposal that will not dump the burden on lower and  middle income families while shifting even more onto the backs of local property taxpayers.

For more about some of the tax proposals – good and bad – read;

CT Newsjunkie:  Finance Committee Explores Abundance of Revenue Ideas As Deadline Nears

Some legislators want to shovel even more money to some of Connecticut’s Charter Schools

A recent article by Wendy Lecker entitled, Beware the new Connecticut legislative plan to channel even more public funds to charters, noted that a group of Democratic state legislators have released a plan aimed at diverting even more scarce public funds to Connecticut’s charter schools will doing little to address the underlying system that inadequately funds Connecticut’s public schools.

Turning their backs on the need for a state-wide school funding adequacy study, Senate Majority Leader Bob Duff (D-Norwalk) and State Representative Jason Rojas (D-East Hartford) have proposed an extraordinary school funding system that would promote a Trump/DeVos like “school choice” program in Connecticut.

Their plan would divert even more taxpayer funds to Connecticut’s charter schools, while taking money away from Connecticut’s successful magnet schools.

As the CT Mirror reported, their plan proposes to have the;

“…state calculate how much each local district spends to educate a student on average and then withhold one-quarter of that amount for each student who leaves for a magnet or charter school. The withheld funding would be sent to the school the child actually attends.

Currently districts do not get funding for students who leave for charter schools. However, districts still get state funding for students who leave for magnet schools, which is somewhat offset by tuition that magnets charge the sending districts.

The changes that Duff and Rojas propose would drive huge funding increases for several charter schools — including about $1,800 more per student for Achievement First Hartford Academy and $1,700 for Stamford Academy…

[…]

The network of regional magnet schools opened in the Hartford region in an effort to comply with a Connecticut Supreme Court order to desegregate Hartford schools would be hit hard by the changes, with a loss of $3,569 per student.

The legislators’ plan also fails to properly account for the added cost of educating students who require special educations services and those who need extra help learning the English Language.

One explanation for the proposal’s failures is that it appears to have been developed in conjunction with The Connecticut School Finance Project, a charter school advocacy front group that has been working closely – in violation of Connecticut’s ethics laws – with Governor Dannel Malloy and his administration.

Connecticut Alliance for Privacy in Education speaks out against changes to new student privacy law

As explained in the Wait, What? post entitled,  ALERT – Legislation seeking to undo student privacy protections now before CT Legislature’s Education Committee, legislation has been introduced that would undermine Connecticut’s new student privacy law.

In legislative testimony this week, the Connecticut Alliance for Privacy in Education explained why the change is unnecessary and inappropriate.

Parents should take a moment to read this important information.

CAPE testified;

HB 7207 would delay student data privacy protections enacted last year until July 1, 2018. HB 7207 would undermine protections that students, from prek through grade 12 currently have as a result of the committee’s hard work last year when it enacted PA 16-189 with bi-partisan support.

The proposed bill would keep parents in the dark regarding the release of their children’s records. It would keep parents in the dark regarding contractors who have access to their children’s records. It would keep parents in the dark even in the event of breach of student data. The proposed bill undermines several sections to the law that was passed overwhelmingly by legislators and supported by parents, educators and other critical voices representing children. It undermines security requirements for contractors and operators of websites and apps and delays the implementation of a breach policy. It leaves unaddressed the fact that a task force created last year to address ongoing issues was never convened. It would leave children in Connecticut less protected than those in other states where 73 laws on student data privacy have been enacted.

We can see no reason that any part of this law, let along the entire law, should be delayed. At a time when security and transparency provisions have already been long overdue in this state, HB 7207 would delay protections for more than 2 years from the time this committee recommended a bill to the General Assembly. Connecticut would be going backwards.

In addition, PA 16-189 established a task force to address unmet and ongoing student privacy issues. It was never convened. The task force would have addressed issues regarding enforcement and penalties for third party violators, training in data security and handling, an inventory of approved resources, the development of a tool kit for use by school districts, a means by which parents could reasonably request the deletion of student information that is held by third parties, and to provide model practices in the state. The task force was good policy passed as a good faith promise to parents and other stakeholders that more would be done to protect students.

Some districts have done their due diligence and are doing the right thing by their students and the law. However, other districts are finding compliance more challenging and could benefit from some assistance. This was not an unforeseen issue, and one reason for the creation of a task force was for it to provide guidance and a toolkit for implementation.

Thankfully, the Connecticut Commission on Educational Technology (CCET), in collaboration with The Department of Administrative Services, has undertaken the task of assisting districts (You can see what they have done here: Operationalizing Public Act 189 http://www.ct.gov/ctedtech/cwp/view.asp?a=1182&q=253412). Their work is commendable and likely to result in most districts being in compliance in the near future – unless this bill is enacted, giving districts and opponents justification to halt progress.

It is important to note that according to CCET, an unanticipated benefit of this law is that an accounting of purchases and agreements has helped districts to identify redundancies and inefficiencies, effectively streamlining purchases and processes. We commend CCET on its work and commitment to the privacy of students.

Still, a permanent Advisory Council that enables all stakeholders to collaborate on behalf of students is necessary and should be added into the law. As many of you know, we often do our best work when all voices are represented and working together to address shared challenges and develop collaborative solutions.

It should also be noted that PA 16-189 did not stop the collection of student data or its appropriate use for instructional purposes and to improve student learning. It simply provided greater notice and transparency for parents and delineated contract provisions and technical security safeguards, while seeking to address misuse and instances of breach.

The jury is no longer out. There has been a wealth of information and resources to help us understand why it is necessary for us to do this and how to do it right. We have learned from state and federal guidance documents, two legislative sessions worth of public hearings and forums, television and radio reports, and too many news articles with headlines shouting “breach”. We urge that you stand behind this policy and stand with the parents and students of your districts by saying “No Delay

Now is the time to make sure legislators understand that they should reject the effort to undermine Connecticut’s new student privacy law.

ALERT – Legislation seeking to undo student privacy protections now before CT Legislature’s Education Committee

In this day and age of widespread data breaches, Governor Dannel Malloy, Attorney General George Jepsen and an overwhelming majority of Connecticut state legislators say they support privacy protections.  They’ve even passed laws that guarantee notification and required protection for those whose data has been breached.

But in an incredibly underhanded maneuver, a new bill is being considered by the Education Committee that would roll back critically important protections for parents and children if data collected at school is breached.

House Bill 7207 strips the protection that students currently have by repealing the existing requirement that parents be notified if their child’s information is released via a corporate breach.

One would think that elected officials would be outraged, but with industry lobbying seeking to turn back the clock on these important notification requirements there is only silence from Governor Dannel Malloy and Attorney General George Jepsen — both of whom publicly bragged about their commitment to protecting Connecticut residents from data breaches.

In fact, just two years ago, Malloy and Jepsen pushed for legislative action requiring companies to notify and protect residents in the case of a breach and last year Malloy signed the new education law (Public Act 16-189) which targeted companies that do business with public schools.

But now with the new push to undo those protections, Malloy and Jepsen are nowhere to be seen.

As the parent run Connecticut Alliance for Student Privacy explains,

This year’s proposed bill (HB 7207) delays the effective date of the law passed last session from October 1, 2016 to July 1, 2018. 

The law, as passed last year, did not stop the collection of student data or its appropriate use for instructional purposes or to improve student outcomes. It simply provides greater notice and transparency for parents and delineates contract provisions and technical security safeguards, while seeking to address misuse and instances of breach.

The effort to undo Connecticut’s new law is even garnering national attention.  Fellow education advocate and blogger, Cheri Kiesecker, recently posted the following on her Missouri Education Watchdog blog.

Connecticut legislators don’t want to protect students after all. Attacking Student Data Privacy Law–AGAIN.

Connecticut passed a student data privacy and transparency bill, Public Act 189,  in 2016.

The bill adopted common sense policies associated with contracts between school districts and corporations that collect, maintain, and share student data.  The CT law does NOT limit data collection, does not require parental consent prior to collecting data, it only asks that NEW or renewed contracts and bids collecting student data must handle data appropriately. The law requires parents to be notified if their child’s data is breached. To their credit, the CT Commission on Educational Technology has done great work and is prepared and ready for this law to be implemented.  You can see their plan here: Operationalizing Public Act 189.

Why then, are some lawmakers in CT introducing bills to cripple this new law that protects student data privacy? Do they not think that keeping student data safe, notifying parents of a breach is important?

You may remember one Connecticut legislator introduced a bill in January to entirely repeal this new student privacy law.  As CT blogger and parent Jonathon Pelto wrote,

“…in an astonishing, baffling and extremely disturbing move, State Representative Stephen Harding (R-107th District) has introduced legislation (HB 5233) to repeal this important law (Public Act 16-189)

…It is not clear who would ask Representative Harding to propose such a bill or why the representative would seek to do such harm to Connecticut’s students, parents and public schools.”

Fortunately, Representative Harding withdrew the bill after receiving much pushback (understandably) from the parent community.

New bill “Revising” CT Student Privacy to be heard Monday, March 6

This past week a new bill, 7207 to “revise” the student data privacy law, was introduced, and will be heard by the CT Joint Education Committee this Monday, March 6.  This kind of a rush job could imply that they are hoping to pass this bill without giving parents time to react.  This new bill, 7207, wants to repeal the data privacy law and delay further implementation until July 1, 2018.   This would remove existing protection of school children for over a year.  WHY?

The Student Data Privacy Law has been in effect since Oct. 1, 2016; it only applies to NEW contracts, only asks for transparency, the CT Edtech Commission has already done the work to implement it. WHY, would Connecticut want to now repeal protection and transparency?

[…]

Is it asking too much that when a company contracts with a school and collects and uses and shares children’s data, that the data be kept safe and parents be able to see how that data is used, breached, and not sold?

By repealing or delaying this law, who are they protecting?

Connecticut parents and other citizens opposed to stripping children of the privacy protections contained in Public Act 189 should take immediate steps to notify their legislators that this unwarranted and inappropriate assault on protecting students and parents must be defeated.

For more about this legislative effort to undermine Public Act 189 go to the CT Alliance for Privacy in Education’s Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com/CTStudentDataPrivacy/posts/618261395030545

Massachusetts said NO to more charter schools, Connecticut should as well

At the same time that Governor Dannel Malloy is instituting the deepest cuts in Connecticut history to Connecticut’s public schools he is diverting more than $110 million dollars a year in taxpayer funds to Connecticut’s privately owned and operated charter schools.

Malloy and his operatives now want to expand this outrageous money grab with a plan to increase the number of charter schools in Connecticut and implement a new funding proposal that would see an additional $40-$50 million a year diverted to the private corporations that own Connecticut’s existing charter schools.

Connecticut’s elected and appointed officials should take a deep pause and look to Massachusetts for an indication of what happens when a state adopts this so-called “money follows the child” funding system.

Last November the charter school industry in the Bay State tried to push through a state-wide ballot initiative that would have allowed more charter schools to be opened in the Commonwealth.

To fund their effort the charter school industry pumped more than $24 million dollars into their political campaign.

The cash came from large corporate education reform “dark money” groups that refuse to release the names of their donors, wealthy hedge fund owners, Massachusetts corporations and out-of-state contributors including the Walton family of Wal-Mart fame and former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg.  (See Wait, What? post Charter School Industry raised more than $24 million in 2016 record breaking defeat In Massachusetts).

But in this case, the massive outpouring of money couldn’t buy the outcome of the election as parents, educators and taxpayers successfully pushed back against those who seek to privatize public education in the United States.  On Election Day, 62 percent of voters cast their ballots against the measure and only 38 percent in favor of the provision.

Barbara Madeloni, President of the Massachusetts Teachers Assocation, summed up the significant victory saying;

 “It’s really clear from the results of this election that people are interested in public education and value that.”

Madeloni added,

“There should be no conversation about expanding charters until the Legislature fully fund our public schools.”

Media coverage of the Massachusetts ballot initiative explained the outcome noting,

“The opposition could not match the “Yes on 2” campaign on television advertisement spending. But the “no” camp had the support of prominent Democrats, including Senator Elizabeth Warren and Boston Mayor Martin J. Walsh. And it mobilized a sprawling field operation, with hundreds of teachers and liberal activists reaching an estimated 1.5 million voters statewide over the course of the campaign.”

In Massachusetts, voters realized that the charter schools were diverting scarce taxpayer funds away from local public school because Massachusetts already utilizes what is called a “money follows the child” school funding formula.  This funding system means that,

“When students leave traditional public schools for charters, they take thousands of dollars in state aid with them. And opponents focused heavily on this financial strain, raising the specter of cuts to arts education, transportation, and other services at the schools that serve the vast majority of students.”

Connecticut’s charter school advocacy groups have recently proposed just such a system for Connecticut and it is very likely that Malloy, an advocate of privatizing public education, will adopt their proposal as his own when he issues his proposed state budget next week.   See the Wait, What? Post of January 26, 2017 entitled Connecticut – Beware the charter school industry’s proposed new school funding scheme.

The question now is whether the state legislature will do Malloy’s bidding or actually step forward and do what is best for Connecticut’s students, parents, educators, public schools and taxpayers.

Stay tuned!

Sackler ponies up $8,000 more in Charter School Industry’s effort to influence legislative races in Connecticut

As the 2016 Election came to a close, charter school aficionado and big-time campaign donor – Jonathan Sackler – whose company makes OxyContin, dropped $8,000 into the Charter Cares Political Action Committee, the entity that raised more than $86,000 to support a handful of pro-charter school legislative candidates during this year’s election cycle.  Sackler’s latest contribution comes on top of a $10,000 donation he already made to the charter school PAC.

During the General Election, Charter Cares PAC devoted their resources in support of two legislative campaigns, one effort for incumbent State Senator Steve Cassano (D-Manchester) and the other for incumbent State Representative Andre Bumgardner (R-New London/Groton).

Cassano squeaked out a narrow victory while Bumgardner lost to his Democratic opponent.

Of the total amount of money Charters Care raised, the majority came from Education Reform Now, a shadowy New York based “Dark Money” group that refuses to identify its donors.

In addition to Jonathan Sackler, who is Governor Dannel Malloy’s biggest contributor, other major donors to Charters Care were individuals directly associated with Achievement First, Inc and ConnCAN.

Achievement First, Inc. is the large charter school management company that owns and operates charter schools in Connecticut, New York and Rhode Island.  ConnCAN is Connecticut’s leading charter school advocacy group that has led the record breaking lobbying effort in favor of Governor Dannel Malloy’s pro-charter school, anti-public school initiative.

According to reports filed with the State Elections Enforcement Commission, Achievement First and ConnCAN connected donors to Charters Care included Brian Olson who donated $10,000 and Andrew Boas who contributed $4,500.

For more about Charters Care, Education Reform Now Network and their Connecticut campaign effort check out;

New York Dark Money, Pro-Charter Group pours another $15,000 into Connecticut legislative races

Charter School Industry drops $63,000 plus into Connecticut legislative races

Connecticut taxpayers robbed by their elected officials and the Lockheed Martin Corporation

The politicians and industry officials were beaming.  The media was singing their praises.  The Connecticut General Assembly had just voted to give Lockheed Martin $220 million in public funds.

The question was not whether Lockheed Martin was going to get paid for producing a new line of helicopters.  The question was whether, in addition to payment and excessive profits, a state government would pay the Lockheed Martin Corporation even more money in return for a promise that the company would produce those machines in their state.

And Lockheed Martin found a willing partner in the form of Governor Dannel Malloy and the members of the Connecticut General Assembly.

Yesterday, Connecticut’s elected officials voted – almost unanimously – to give Lockheed Martin $220 million in corporate welfare.  Counting principal and interest, the cost to Connecticut taxpayers will exceed a quarter of a billion dollars over the next twenty years.

In return, Lockhead Martin, a $50 Billion a year company, has promised to keep Sikorsky’s headquarters in Connecticut for at least a decade, add up to 550 new jobs at the Sikorsky plant and build some new helicopters here in the state.

The underlying threat was that If Connecticut’s taxpayers didn’t cough up the blood money, Lockheed Martin would retaliate by moving the Sikorsky work to a factory in another state or overseas.

And the $220 million taxpayers will be paying?

As Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Lockheed Martin Corporation, Marilyn Hewson made in excess of $29 million in 2015.  Her pay and benefits topped $106 million over the past five years.  Meanwhile, the top five Lockheed Martin corporate officers pulled in approximately $62 million in pay and benefits last year.

That $220 million that Connecticut taxpayers are donating to the company barely equates to what the top five corporate officials have made over the last five years.

But Connecticut’s elected officials weren’t talking about padding the salaries of Lockheed Martin’s executives yesterday, instead they were patting themselves on the back for agreeing to the deal.

Governor Dannel Malloy crowed about the gift Connecticut was making to one of the most profitable members of the military-industrial complex saying,

“Competition in today’s worldwide economic climate is fierce, and Connecticut is showing that we remain a valued leader where businesses can maintain a competitive edge well into the future,”

Meanwhile, State Senator Catherine Osten, (D-Sprague), celebrated the deal calling it, “an unalloyed piece of good news,” and stating,

“I’m more than happy to support this deal. I think it’s a great day. I think it’s a turning point in Connecticut.”

Maintaining a competitive edge?  The development is an unalloyed piece of good news?

To reiterate the obvious, this was not about whether Lockheed Martin was going to get paid to build a new line of helicopters.  Not only were public and private funds paying for the helicopters, but Lockheed Martin was always going to make a massive profit on each unit.

The reference to the so-called competitive climate was simply a question of which state – or country – was willing to pay Lockheed Martin above and beyond their costs and profits in order to “win” the company’s benign neglect.

In January 1960, President Eisenhower warned us of the danger of the Military-Industrial Complex.

Yesterday, we saw that more than fifty-five years later, there were only 7 out of 187 members of the Connecticut General Assembly who had the courage and conviction to stand up to that political cabal.

Voting against the horrendous deal…

Republican State Senator Markley and Republican State Representatives Ackert, Belsito, Dubitksy, France, Sampson and Smith.

You read read more about the story and how the media covered it via:

CTMirror: http://ctmirror.org/2016/09/28/sikorsky-incentives-win-bipartisan-approval-in-special-session/

CTNewsjunkie: http://www.ctnewsjunkie.com/archives/entry/lawmakers_look_favorably_upon_deal_to_keep_helicopter_production_in_connect/

Courant: http://www.courant.com/politics/hc-sikorsky-connecticut-deal-20160928-story.html